MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2298467086 · doi:10.14288/1.0089423

The nitrogen nutrition of lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta var. contorta) and Sitka spruce (Picea sitchensis (Bong.) Carr.) on a cedar-hemlock cutover on northern Vancouver Island

2009· article· en· W2298467086 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Karen Bothwell

Bibliographic record

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPinus contortaCarrForestryWestern HemlockBotanyGeographyBiologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nursing mixtures with pine or larch have been widely used in Britain and Ireland to aid the establishment of Sitka spruce (Picea sitchensis (Bong.) Carr.) on low-nitrogen, Calluna dominated heathlands and peatlands. The overall result is increased height and diameter growth and increased foliar N concentrations of the spruce and increased N mineralization rates in the forest floor in mixed stands, about 8-10 years after planting. Cedar-hemlock cutovers are ecologically analogous to Calluna sites, both being dominated by ericaceous shrubs and having extremely low nitrogen availability. Growth check symptoms, including reduced leader growth and chlorosis after 5 to 8 years are akin to symptoms observed in British and Irish plantations. A nurse trial was established on a cedar-hemlock cutover on northern Vancouver Island with the objective of testing the efficacy of lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta Dougl. var. contorta) and western white pine (Pinus monticola Dougl. ex D. Don) as nurse species for Sitka spruce regeneration. There were three treatments (pure spruce, spruce in mixture with lodgepole pine and spruce in mixture with white pine), replicated three times. The treatments were established at three different spacings. The trial was remeasured at ten years, however there was no evidence of increased height or diameter growth or increased foliar nitrogen concentrations of the spruce in mixture. Possible reasons for this are suggested. What was evident was the superior growth and nutrition of lodgepole pine on this nitrogen-poor site. The second part of the research focused on examining possible mechanisms leading to the superior growth of lodgepole pine on sites with low nitrogen availability. A field biomass harvest of pine and spruce trees from a cedar-hemlock cutover and a greenhouse bioassay were conducted to examine whether pine accessed more nitrogen, distributed more biomass and nitrogen above ground, and/or was more efficient in the use of the nitrogen taken up through greater production of biomass per unit of nitrogen taken up and/or through greater nitrogen retranslocation at time of senescence. Rooting distribution patterns were examined to determine if pine might have access to different nitrogen pools. Some mycorrhizae, including some species specific to pine, have access to organic forms of nitrogen, therefore mycorrhizal assessments of the communities infecting the pine and spruce were conducted. The abilities of pine and spruce to access different nitrogen sources, both inorganic and organic were also tested. Lodgepole pine took up more nitrogen and had much larger aboveground biomass production. The greater growth and nitrogen status of pine were attributed to greater foliage efficiency. Pine had a deeper root system and the root tips were heavily infected with mycorrhizal fungi, which have high proteolytic activity such as Suillus.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.968
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.003
GPT teacher head0.155
Teacher spread0.151 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)→Same topicFire effects on ecosystems→French-language works237,207→